Unofficial Claims That Iran Involved in Kidnap of Peter Moore

Is it possible that The Guardian has managed to obtain “inside information” about Peter Moore’s kidnapping from his captors, or are they trying to compete with The Sun for publishing sensational (but unconfirmed) stories?

According to reports by The Guardian, Peter Moore’s kidnapping was masterminded by Iran; although the Government has said it has no evidence of a link.

It is odd that the “date” is verbally mentioned in the videos showing the alleged captors, as this normally is shown in other ways. The videos were also recorded some time ago, yet this is the first time we have been told of their existence. Why is that?

Are the people being interviewed falsely claiming to be the kidnappers and lying about the Iran connection, and for what purpose?

The British and American governments claim to have no knowledge of the information presented by The Guardian, which seems to suggest the following:

The claims made are based on unreliable sources (which attract hits), but the informants are protected under “condition of anonymity”. So we can’t check the accuracy of the information provided.

The intelligence agencies have failed (again) to act on important information, or this information was not shared by The Guardian.

The information was fabricated and allowed to fall into the hands of The Guardian, so that the “Iran connection” could be promoted to further the desire to carry out an attack on Iran in the very near future.

As mentioned in a recent article regarding the Nigerian “Christmas bomber”, I stated the following: “Promoting the “terror threat” is designed to make past actions (invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan) more acceptable to the public, something Tony Blair will be hoping for before his appearance at the Iraq Inquiry soon. It is also expected to give support for an attack on Iran and many of the future terrorist attacks will attempt to make a connection to this country (more than they have in the past).”

Is this latest claim just another attempt to give the public the impression that Iran must be dealt with in the strongest possible way (military action)? Almost all of the accusations against Iran cannot be supported by proof. So far we have heard that they are “thinking” of developing a nuclear weapon, they are supporting Hamas, they are attempting to import purified uranium from Kazakhstan, they are supplying weapons to Iraq, they are behind a shipment of weapons to Syria, and so it goes on.

Much the same tactics were used against Saddam Hussein and Iraq, and we all know what happened later.

There can be little doubt that the US and Britain have had some hand in the recent protests seen in Iran (at least financial backing); because this is something they have done before. But this was probably the last attempt at trying to obtain a regime change without the need for military action. Sadly, we can now expect to see a more determined endeavour to provide “proof” that Iran is guilty of some serious terrorist involvement.

The “proof” that will be presented does not have to be genuine (like the WMD in Iraq), it just has to be convincing enough for the public to swallow. Unfortunately, because the public tend to obtain their “facts” from the manipulating mainstream media, this probably won’t be too difficult to achieve.

Should something terrible happen in the coming weeks or months, and the blame placed on Iran, we should be certain to ask ourselves whether the information provided is really genuine or simply convenient claims that we have seen all too often.

It is very worrying that The Guardian’s claims are attracting so much credibility, considering they cannot be proven and the authorities do not support them (officially). We are now seeing headlines that give the impression this information is factual and you can be sure that millions of people will already be accepting it as such. Is it any wonder some people are concerned about the power of the mainstream media?

BREAKING NEWS: According to the latest reports, Peter Moore denies any Iranian involvement in his kidnapping and confirms at least two locations in Iraq where he was held.

Hopefully, in view of this information, The Guardian will retract their claim immediately on the grounds that their sources are unreliable (before any further damage is done)